The UK Photographers In England and Wales, any unauthorised entry on particular recreational purpose, such as sports fields European
tional purpose, such as sports fields European Convention on Human Rights gives
Rights Guide v2
by Linda Macpherson
Image Shaun Lombard - iStockphoto.com #9252667
Restrictions on the Right to Take Photographs -
It is often said that there is "no law against taking
a photograph", but in fact there are many legal
restrictions on the right to take a photograph, so
it would be more correct to say that one is free to
take photographs except when the law provides
otherwise.
This is intended to provide a short guide to
the main legal restrictions on the right to take
photographs and the right to publish photographs
that have been taken. It is not an all-encompassing
discussion of the law, and any photographer faced
with unusual circumstances or specific difficulties
should take legal advice.
Private Property - Owners of property do not
normally have the right to prevent someone from
taking photographs of their property from a public
place such as a public highway, (though see below
for issues of national security). There is also no
general restriction on taking photographs while on
private property, provided the photographer has
permission to be on the property. However, the
owner has the right to impose whatever conditions
he wishes on entry to his property, including
a restriction on photography. Photography is
prohibited by the conditions of entry to many
museums and stately homes, for example, and by
most concert venues.
A person who enters onto private property without
permission commits a trespass, as does anyone who
interferes with the property. Interference could be
something as minor as climbing on the landowners
wall to take a photograph over the wall or resting
a camera on a fence. If a person has permission to
enter property on the condition that he does not
take photographs, but he ignores the condition, he
becomes a trespasser as soon as he takes a photo.
Even where property is open to entry by the public
in general, as in the case of most business premises,
the owner or occupier has the right to demand that
a photographer cease taking photographs and the
right to demand that he leave the premises.
to privately owned land, or buildings or structures and golf courses. everyone the right to respect for his private and
attached to land, is a trespass, regardless of whether family life, his home and his correspondence. The
any damage is done to the property. This is not a It is a criminal offence, punishable by a fine, to trespass Convention rights are taken into account by the
criminal offence in most circumstances, but the on some property, notably railways, aerodromes, UK courts in determining any cases that come
landowner can sue for damages for trespass even if military bases and places where explosives are before them. As this area of the law is changing and
no physical damage has been caused. manufactured and/or stored. A photographer developing, it is hard to be certain about what will
who enters onto these kinds of premises without and what will not amount to an infringement of
There is a perception that, in Scotland, there is no permission is liable to be arrested. Article 8.
law of trespass. This is incorrect, but damages can
only be claimed if actual damage has been caused. Restrictions on Photography in Certain Public The use of long lens to take a photo of someone in
In all three jurisdictions, a landowner can seek an Places - There is a prohibition on taking photographs a private place, such as their home, without their
injunction (interdict in Scotland) to prevent an in Trafalgar Square and Parliament Square in London. consent, is an invasion of privacy even though the
individual from continuing to trespass. In theory, The prohibition only applies to photographs taken photo is taken from a public place.
a court could also make an order preventing the in connection with any business, profession or
publication of photographs taken while trespassing, employment, so that tourist photographs, for For images of people in public places, the key seems
but the UK courts have been reluctant to do this. example, would be allowed. It is possible to take to be whether the place is one where a person would
photographs in the Squares for business purposes, have a reasonable expectation of privacy and the
Property owners have limited rights of self-help provided written permission is obtained from the courts have greatly extended the areas where this
against a trespasser. An occupier can use reasonable Greater London Authority. A hefty fee is payable. might be the case. A court has held that the right of
force to prevent a trespasser entering his property privacy of a child might be infringed by the taking
and also to remove a trespasser who refuses to leave. The same prohibition (on commercial photography) and publishing of a photograph of him with his
A violent attack would be unreasonable, as would applies in the Royal Parks. Again, permission can be parents in a public street. Privacy actions in the UK
threatening someone with a gun or other weapon. obtained and a fee is charged. have been concerned with publication rather than
The same rules apply to security guards, bouncers simply the taking of a photograph, but a recent
and the like; they are acting as agents of the owner Harassment and Invasion of Privacy - It is illegal to decision of the ECHR suggest that simply taking
or occupier of property and they too can only use harass another person and taking photographs could a photograph may, in some circumstances, infringe
reasonable force. Neither the property owner nor his amount to harassment. This isn't to say that someone the right. Photographers are therefore advised to
employees have any right to confiscate or damage could claim they were being harassed just because be careful when taking photographs intended for
a photographer's camera or other equipment, or to they were being photographed when they didn't some kind of publication, even when the subject is
demand film or the deletion of memory cards. In want to be. Harassment is essentially behaviour in a public place. Photographs taken of people at
practical terms, though, a photographer who is that causes another person alarm or distress and it public events are probably still permissible, at least
trespassing would be best advised to leave when refers to a course of conduct, not a single incident. for the present. The general advice is to get consent,
asked; just because a landowner isnt allowed to use (A "course of conduct" means at least two occasions.) and preferably written consent, wherever possible.
violence doesnt necessarily mean that he wont. If a photographer stalks a subject in order to get a Failure to obtain a signed model release will
photograph of them, or repeatedly thrusts a camera certainly impair the commercial use of an image,
Legislation has given the public certain rights to in someone's face, this might be harassment. because many photo libraries, stock agencies and
access private property. In England and Wales, the the like will not accept an image of a recognisable
Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 created In England, Wales and Northern Ireland, harassment person without a release.
access rights to certain areas of open country and is a criminal offence, for which the penalty is up to
coastline. Maps are available that show the areas 6 months in prison, or a fine, or both. A victim of Photographs of people may also be subject to the
where access is allowed. There are various restrictions harassment can also ask for an injunction to prevent Data Protection Act, which controls the "processing"
on the use of access land and they include any further harassment and bring a claim for damages. of "personal data", that is, data relating to an
activity organised or undertaken for any commercial Breaching an injunction is also a criminal offence. individual and from which the individual can be
purpose. Thus, photography would be permitted, identified. There has not yet been a court case that
but commercial photography would, in theory, not In Scotland, harassment itself is not a criminal has determined whether or not an image of a person,
be. In Scotland, the Land Reform (Scotland) Act offence, but the victim can ask the court for a without any other identifying information, would
2003 provides much wider rights. There is a right of "non-harassment order" against the person who be caught by the Act, so photographers should be
access to all land, inland waterways and foreshores is harassing him. Breach of the order is a criminal aware of the possibility. The Act also contains an
for certain activities. Photography, whether for offence. In addition, a person who harasses another exception for processing undertaken with a view to
recreation or profit, comes within the permitted might be charged with breach of the peace, which publication of any journalistic, literary or artistic
activities. Access rights do not extend to buildings is a crime in Scotland. Breach of the peace, unlike material, if certain criteria are met.
or structures or the land immediately surrounding harassment, requires only a single incident.
them; photographers will not, for example, have the Photographs of Children - The law relating to
right of access to the garden of a suburban house. The law surrounding invasion of privacy has harassment, invasion of privacy and data protection
Also excluded is land that has been developed for a developed rapidly in recent years. Article 8 of the applies in the same way to children as to adults, but
a child does not have the legal capacity to consent argue and move further from the scene if requested subjected to questions and/or have a camera bag or the consent of the copyright owner. It would
and a parent or guardian must consent on his behalf. to do so by the police. Refusal might lead to an arrest vehicle searched, failure to cooperate might result in therefore be an infringement of copyright to take
for obstruction. detention for several hours at a police station. a photograph of a copyright protected art work,
It is a criminal offence to take an indecent or a photograph of a photograph. It isn't an
photograph of a child under the age of 18 or to National Security - In recent years, sensitivity over Court Proceedings - It is a criminal offence to infringement of copyright to take a photo of, for
make a photograph that appears to be such (e.g. by issues of security and prevention of terrorism has take a photograph in a law court, and an additional example, a particular landscape or building even
pasting an image of a childs head on an image of a been very high. This has led to photographers being offence to publish any photo taken in a court. The if the same view has been photographed many
nude adult body). confronted by police when taking photographs penalty is a fine of up to a maximum of 1,000. This times before. Each photo would be regarded as
of subjects that previously would not have been restriction extends beyond the courtroom itself to an independently created work. But it might be
The Editors Code provides that journalists must thought of as particularly sensitive. anywhere in the building and to "the precincts of the infringement of copyright to deliberately set out to
not interview or photograph a child under 16 on court", i.e. the surrounding area. The extent of "the recreate another photographer's photo.
subjects involving the welfare of the child, or other Two areas of the law might come into play to restrict precincts of the court" is not defined anywhere and
children, without the consent of the parent of the the right to take photographs of certain places. The the authorities often turn a blind eye to photography Copyright is not infringed by the incidental
child. first is the Official Secrets Act 1911. This makes it outside the court building. inclusion of a copyright work in a photograph.
an offence to take a photograph of a "prohibited For example, copyright would not be infringed by
A child under 16 cannot be used as a paid model place" where this might be useful to an enemy. The Tribunals of Inquiry are not covered by the a photograph of a street scene in which there was
unless a licence is obtained from the local authority. term "prohibited place" encompasses a great variety prohibition on taking photographs in court, and it advertising material on display, but this was not the
of places. is up to the individual tribunal to decide whether it main subject of the photo.
It is not illegal as such to photograph children in will allow photographs of the proceedings.
a public place, however in some circumstances In practice, however, anti-terrorism legislation is It is not an infringement of copyright to take
it will almost certainly draw the attention of the likely to be a much bigger problem for photographers Be aware that, even when it is legal to take photographs of buildings, sculptures and works of
police and may result in the photographer being than the Official Secrets Act. photographs it might not be legal to publish artistic craftsmanship that are permanently situated
investigated. In Scotland it may be treated as a them. There are restrictions on the publication of in a public place or in premises that are open to
breach of the peace. It is advisable to get at least Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 gives the photographs of people involved in legal proceedings, the public.
verbal consent from the parents wherever possible. police wide powers to stop and search anyone for even when these are taken away from the court, if
articles of a kind which could be used in connection they would prejudice the course of justice, endanger Bank Notes - Taking photographs of UK bank
Many organisations and local authorities involved with terrorism regardless of whether they have a witness or identify the victim of a sexual offence. It notes is an offence unless permission has been
in childrens sporting and other activities have, reason to suspect that the presence of such articles. is an offence to publish any image of a young person given in writing by the "relevant authority". The
as part of their child protection policies, strict They also have the power to seize any such article, under 18 who is involved in any legal proceedings, relevant authority for English notes is the Bank
rules about photography at events. It is worth if found. Section 44 powers, which can also be whether as a party or as a witness. The court can, by of England, and for Scottish and Irish notes the
inquiring about the policy before attempting to exercised by PCSOs in the presence of a constable, order, lift these restrictions. relevant authority is the bank that issued the notes.
take photographs at such events, even if you are the only apply in areas where an authorisation has
parent of a child taking part. been given. Photographers should be aware that Wildlife - Many wild animals, including insects, Linda Macpherson 30th March 2009
some authorisations cover wide areas and have been and birds are protected by the Wildlife and
Obstruction and Public Order - It is a criminal continually renewed for a long time. Countryside Act 1981. There is no restriction on Disclaimer - While care has been taken to ensure
offence to obstruct free passage on the highway taking photographs of any animal or bird, but the that the information contained in this guide is
and this includes footways and cycle paths as The Act also makes it an offence to take or possess Act makes it an offence to "disturb" some species accurate as of 30th March 2009, it does not provide
well as roads. Whether a photographer will be a photograph containing information likely to be when they at or near their nesting places or places a comprehensive in-depth discussion of the relevant
treated as causing an obstruction depends on the useful to a person committing or preparing an act of shelter. This includes disturbing them by taking law. The information it contains is of a general nature
reasonableness of his behaviour. Setting up a tripod of terrorism (s.58) And since February 2009, it is photographs of them. To photograph protected and is not intended to be legal advice. The guide is
in a busy street is obviously likely to cause an an offence to elicit or attempt to elicit information species at or near their nests or places of shelter, a provided without warranty as to the accuracy of the
obstruction. The police will usually initially ask the about anyone who is or who has been a member photographer must have a licence from the relevant information it contains, and users are urged to consult
photographer to move along rather than arrest him, of the armed force, the police or the intelligence authority: English Nature, Scottish Natural Heritage a solicitor in respect of any specific legal problems
unless his behaviour is persistent. services, where this is of a kind likely to be useful to or the Countryside Council for Wales. they might encounter. The author, publisher and
Another obstruction offence is that of obstructing a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism distributor of this guide will not be held responsible
a police officer in the execution of his duty. This (s.58A). A full list of protected birds can be found at for any loss suffered by any person that is directly of
basically means doing anything that makes it more http://www.naturenet.net/law/sched1.html indirectly attributable to reliance on the information
difficult for the police to carry out their duties Some police officers appear to take a fairly broad view and a full list of protected animals at contained in this guide.
effectively. Getting in the way of the police while of "information likely to be useful", but courts have http://www.naturenet.net/law/sched5.html
trying to photograph an incident, for example, been rather more restrictive in their interpretation Linda Macpherson LL.B, Dip. L.P., LL.M is a freelance
would be obstructing them. of s.58. Copyright and Trademarks - It will sometimes be legal consultant specialising in Media Law and Intellectual
an infringement of copyright to take a photograph Property Law. She is also a part-time law lecturer and has
Photographers who are shooting incidents such It is in a photographer's best interests to cooperate of a work that is protected by copyright. presented seminars on law for photographers.
as riots and illegal demonstrations should take with the police if they approach him when he is
care that the police dont confuse them with the taking photos in an area that might be regarded Copyright is infringed by making a copy of all or PDF design and distribution by Simon Moran
participants. The best advice is to stay calm, dont as sensitive. While it might be irritating to be a substantial part of a copyright work, without www.sirimo.co.uk